Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 DeeDee and others on this board should know that the sign interpretations given by Hanni are not necessarily standard sidereal interpretations. Hanni is basically transferring the tropical meanings to the sidereal signs. As I see it, that's not how it really works. Experienced sidereal astrologers give far more attention to the planets. A person may be a Mars person or a Mars/Venus person, or a Jupiter person, etc. The signs themselves are not nearly as important, and mainly give tones to the planets. The Sun will be much happier in its own sign of Leo, for example than in the Moon's sign of Cancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Hello! In a message dated 4/18/2001 11:40:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, eastwest writes: > > DeeDee and others on this board should know that the sign interpretations > given by Hanni are not necessarily standard sidereal interpretations. Hanni > is basically transferring the tropical meanings to the sidereal signs. As I > see it, that's not how it really works. > That was how Fagan saw it, too. He warned against transferring tropical meanings to sidereal signs -- however, since the Holy Tropical Church saw fit to let Western sidereal books go out of print, the temptation to transfer is very hard to resist. Later, Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Hello, again, n a message dated 4/19/2001 4:50:18 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hanni.wienkoop writes: > > . . .Please,do an interpretation > of Deedee`s character after your idea,so we can see what pleases Deedee > more. > > For the sake of objectivity, Deedee should run both interpretations by her friends. Also, we should look for alternative explanations for the " tropical " proofs ( " I'm such a Pisces, " said the Sidereal Aquarius who had Neptune Conjunct Ascendant, for example). Later, Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2001 Report Share Posted April 19, 2001 Can someone suggest a reference work which details the meaning of sidereal signs? (forgive this newbie question, please). On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Terese Hamilton wrote: > DeeDee and others on this board should know that the sign interpretations > given by Hanni are not necessarily standard sidereal interpretations. > Hanni > is basically transferring the tropical meanings to the sidereal signs. As > I > see it, that's not how it really works. > > Experienced sidereal astrologers give far more attention to the planets. > A > person may be a Mars person or a Mars/Venus person, or a Jupiter person, > etc. The signs themselves are not nearly as important, and mainly give > tones to the planets. The Sun will be much happier in its own sign of > Leo, > for example than in the Moon's sign of Cancer. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2001 Report Share Posted April 20, 2001 At 07:46 AM 4/19/01 -0700, Scott wrote: >Can someone suggest a reference work which details the meaning of sidereal >signs? (forgive this newbie question, please). Scott, that's not a dumb question at all. I've been working in the sidereal zodiac since the 70s and I've come to the conclusion that there is really NO single good book on the sidereal signs. I've been putting together my observations on the signs for many years, and some day I hope to write a book using many example horoscopes. Sometimes the early sidereal masters were right about a sign, and sometimes not. The lunar mansions really do tone sections of the signs, so (in my opinion) you can't say that Gemini, for example, is the same through the entire sign. Early Gemini will be one way, middle Gemini has other characteristics, and the last part of Gemini will be different from the first two sections. We can more or less prove this using Lois Rodden's wonderful tool, AstrodataBase, which has more than 20,000 charts and biographical data. Well, I'm working on it. But it's a long way to go! Maybe later I'll post some examples of how the signs seem to work Sincerely, Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2001 Report Share Posted April 20, 2001 , " Scott A. Fallin " <saf@w...> wrote: > Can someone suggest a reference work which details the meaning of sidereal > signs? (forgive this newbie question, please). > > You can download a free sidereal astroloy zip file called'sidereal.zip' that was compiled by Kay Cavender. At the Mission Astrology Group (MAG) www.siderealzodiac.com In it are the sign descriptions for Sun and Moon written by sidereal astrologers Cyril Fagan, Garth Allen (aka Donald A. Bradley) and Rupert Gleadow. Jack Sirildo Contreras Western Sidereal Astrologer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 Thu, 19 Apr 2001 19:08:34 -0700, Terese Hamilton wrote: >I've been working in the sidereal >zodiac since the 70s and I've come to the conclusion that there is really >NO single good book on the sidereal signs. I've been putting together my >observations on the signs for many years, and some day I hope to write a >book using many example horoscopes. Sometimes the early sidereal masters >were right about a sign, and sometimes not. > >Well, I'm working on it. But it's a long way to go! Maybe later I'll post >some examples of how the signs seem to work Hi Terese, I am very much looking forwards to this! BTW...do you still attach any validity to Tropical signs? Risto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 Fri, 20 Apr 2001 21:18:50 -0000, sidereal wrote:> >You can download a free sidereal astroloy zip file >called'sidereal.zip' that was compiled by Kay Cavender. > >At the Mission Astrology Group (MAG) > >www.siderealzodiac.com > >In it are the sign descriptions for Sun and Moon written by sidereal >astrologers Cyril Fagan, Garth Allen (aka Donald A. Bradley) and >Rupert Gleadow. Jack, Thanks for your valuable hints and suggestions! As Sidereal astrology is a relatively new field to me, I appreciate you and others sharing your knowledge on pertinent resources on the subject. Risto V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2001 Report Share Posted April 24, 2001 At 11:49 AM 4/23/01 +0300, you wrote: Risto asked: >BTW...do you still attach any validity to Tropical signs? I think the OBSERVATIONS re: Tropical signs are valid. But they really belong to the underlying sidereal signs. For example, tropical Leo is said to want to be the center of attention. But if you observe people with a strong Sun, they couldn't care less. Sun people are happy with themselves and are often dedicated to their work. (i.e. think tropical Virgo). It's the MOON that craves attention and adulation. We can only see the real Moon by reflection. So Moon people need something to reflect. Well, the Moon rules Cancer, whose stars are underneath Tropical Leo. Just watch a child with a strong Moon, who will often go to any lengths to get your attention. Jupiter (which rules the masses) is exalted in Cancer, which is why that sign can be so well suited to public life. You can go through the zodiac like this and find good reasons why the traits what people see in the tropical signs fit the previous sidereal sign much better. But there's more to the sidereal signs then the observation of general traits. The actual stars and lunar mansions make it more complicated. Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 This is my first post, so I would like to say hello to everybody. I have been looking at some old posts. It is not easy, as the tool to search archives is quite primitive, so I depend on luck. Anyway, I found this old post, and have a question. The reason I started looking at the sidereal zodiac (about three weeks ago) is that I had problems interpreting some planet placings in the tropical zodiac. For example, I have Venus in Aries in the natal chart, and the tropical interpretation for it ring completely false, however I have Venus in sidereal Pisces, and the (tropical) interpretation for this placing ring true. As a second example, I have the Sun in tropical Pisces, but I think I have very little of a fish. However the (tropical) interpretation for Aquarius Sun does match my personality (my Sun is in sidereal Aquarius). I saw some old posts saying that we should not use the tropical interpretations for sidereal placing. Why? It is true that maybe the tropical interpretation for a sign has some meanings that perhaps belong to the sign before, but if we discount this, why can't we use the tropical interpretations? For my own chart they do make sense. Basically what I want to ask is, why can't we somehow blend together sidereal and tropical Astrology? Maybe that is the way I am going. Because the fact is that there are very few resources on sidereal Astrology, and from a practical point of view, it does not make sense just to discard all the tropical knowledge. But maybe that's just me, I like to integrate things!! Any comments? António , Terese Hamilton <eastwest@s...> wrote: > At 11:49 AM 4/23/01 +0300, you wrote: > Risto asked: > > >BTW...do you still attach any validity to Tropical signs? > > I think the OBSERVATIONS re: Tropical signs are valid. But they really > belong to the underlying sidereal signs. For example, tropical Leo is said > to want to be the center of attention. But if you observe people with a > strong Sun, they couldn't care less. Sun people are happy with themselves > and are often dedicated to their work. (i.e. think tropical Virgo). > > It's the MOON that craves attention and adulation. We can only see the real > Moon by reflection. So Moon people need something to reflect. Well, the > Moon rules Cancer, whose stars are underneath Tropical Leo. Just watch a > child with a strong Moon, who will often go to any lengths to get your > attention. Jupiter (which rules the masses) is exalted in Cancer, which is > why that sign can be so well suited to public life. > > You can go through the zodiac like this and find good reasons why the > traits what people see in the tropical signs fit the previous sidereal sign > much better. > > But there's more to the sidereal signs then the observation of general > traits. The actual stars and lunar mansions make it more complicated. > > Terese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2003 Report Share Posted November 16, 2003 At 05:13 PM 11/14/03 -0000, Antonio wrote: >This is my first post, so I would like to say hello to everybody. Welcome to the list, Antonio! >The reason I started looking at the sidereal zodiac (about three >weeks ago) is that I had problems interpreting some planet placings >in the tropical zodiac. For example, I have Venus in Aries in the >natal chart, and the tropical interpretation for it ring completely >false, however I have Venus in sidereal Pisces, and the (tropical) >interpretation for this placing ring true. > >As a second example, I have the Sun in tropical Pisces, but I think I >have very little of a fish. However the (tropical) interpretation for >Aquarius Sun does match my personality (my Sun is in sidereal >Aquarius). According to the early siderealits including Cyril Fagan, a lot of sign interpretation has become completely scrambled as the Tropoical zodiac shifted away from the fixed sidereal zodiac. So each Tropoical sign is a combination of TRUE observation, which can be applied to the preceding sidereal sign, and FALSE theory based on what the Tropical sign SHOULD represent. So to figure out just how signs apply to your horoscope, you'd have to tell us which characteristics of the Tropical signs you see as yourself, and which don't fit you. Then we can check to see if any of the sidereal sign symbolism fits. There are a lot of Tropical astrology books on the signs, and they often don't agree with each other, so if you'd have to give us more specific information about your personality for us to know what you're talking about. >I saw some old posts saying that we should not use the tropical >interpretations for sidereal placing. Why? Cyril Fagan believed that much of current Tropical sign interpretation could be applied to the preceding sidereal sign. >Basically what I want to ask is, why can't we somehow blend together >sidereal and tropical Astrology? Because this would cause total symbolic confusion! Let's get specific about your personality. If you don't mind, please post our birth data so we have your actual chart to look at. Thanks, Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2003 Report Share Posted November 16, 2003 On Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:21 AM , Therese Hamilton wrote: > Cyril Fagan believed that much of current Tropical sign interpretation > could be applied to the preceding sidereal sign. So doesn't this imply that Tropical and Sidereal will often give the same answers anyway? A Tropical astrologer will say " Fred has his Sun at 5 Leo, and this placement means he is likely to be self-centred and likes to be centre stage " . A Sidereal astrologer will say " No, Fred doesn't have his Sun in Leo at all - he has his Sun at 10 Cancer, and this placement means he is likely to be self-centred and likes to be centre stage " . Or have I missed something obvious here? Chris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2003 Report Share Posted November 16, 2003 At 06:00 PM 11/16/03 -0000, Chris wrote: > >Therese Hamilton wrote: > >> Cyril Fagan believed that much of current Tropical sign interpretation >> could be applied to the preceding sidereal sign. > > >So doesn't this imply that Tropical and Sidereal will often give the same >answers anyway? A Tropical astrologer will say " Fred has his Sun at 5 Leo, >and this placement means he is likely to be self-centred and likes to be >centre stage " . A Sidereal astrologer will say " No, Fred doesn't have his Sun >in Leo at all - he has his Sun at 10 Cancer, and this placement means he is >likely to be self-centred and likes to be centre stage " . Or have I missed >something obvious here? IF...the Tropical interpretation is based on *observation* and not theory, this would be correct. The next questions is, " Where does the liking to be on center stage come from? The Sun or the Moon? " Observation of actual horoscopes will show that it's the Moon that likes attention and response. The sun is happy to just BE. So in the Tropical system the planetary symbolism becomes confused. Another example is Tropical Capricorn/Sidereal Sagittarius. Does the so-called ambition come form Saturn or Jupiter? Well, Jupiter has been shown to be the planet of actors and politicians. Saturn has traditionally been associated with servants and the underdog. A list member sent me a couple of Fagan's articles that deal with the Tropical/sidereal sign question. I'll try to post them today. (Thanks, Carson.) Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2003 Report Share Posted November 16, 2003 On Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:21 PM , Therese Hamilton wrote: > IF...the Tropical interpretation is based on *observation* and not > theory, this would be correct. The next questions is, " Where does the > liking to be on center stage come from? The Sun or the Moon? " > Hi, Therese - Yes, that's a very good point - I can see how it works with Leo/Cancer. However, a tropical astrologer would say about someone with 5 degrees Cancer tropically: " this person has a need for security, and will demonstrate a theme involving emotional nurturing " - Cancer/Moon. A sidereal astrologer would say about the same person " this person has Sun at 10 degrees of Gemini " . Would the interpretation of Gemini, relating to Mercury, be about security and emotional nurtuing in sidereal astrology? Is it generally the case that tropical interpretations about a sign relate sidereally to the planet ruling the preceding sign? Chris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 At 10:20 PM 11/16/03 -0000, Chris wrote: >On Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:21 PM , >Therese Hamilton wrote: > >> IF...the Tropical interpretation is based on *observation* and not >> theory, this would be correct. The next questions is, " Where does the >> liking to be on center stage come from? The Sun or the Moon? " >> >Hi, Therese - Yes, that's a very good point - I can see how it works with >Leo/Cancer. > >However, a tropical astrologer would say about someone with 5 degrees Cancer >tropically: " this person has a need for security, and will demonstrate a >theme involving emotional nurturing " - Cancer/Moon... Tropical Cancer/Sidereal Gemini is an interesting case of sign interpretation. The first question is, " Is the Moon really into nurturing? " If so, then why is the Moon a planet for politicians? Are politicians into nurturing or into making an impression on the public for hoped for votes? They themselves want the attention. I suspect that it's Venus that is more of the 'mother' in astrology because Venus is into making people feel good. It's often into making the home a pleasant environment where people can feel comfortable and so forth. So back to Tropical Cancer/Sidereal Gemini. First, I don't believe that any sign shows a 'need' for anything. It's the planets that will show various needs and wants. So what about this particular sign and nurturing? I have a ready made case, a husband with a mass of planets in this sign, including the Sun. He's very much into what I'd call 'fostering growth in the young, " entertaining children, giving them a good time. He can get right down on their level. He's also very much into gardening, growing plants from seed and caring for them up through the stage when they produce fruit and vegetables. (A case from the Rodden database is a professional gardener with a stellium in Gemini.) Professionally, my husband was a teacher, but he didn't like the classroom situation so much as dealing one-to-one with special students, those who for one reason or another didn't attend regular classrooms. Now let's take Sidereal Gemini's ruler, Mercury. The teaching profession comes under Mercury. Mercury is the child of the planetary pantheon. " All the actions of Mercury (Hermes), whether inventive (the lyre) or felonious (Stealing cattle) were performed as an infant. " (Mythic Astrology, p. 34) In medieval astrology Mercury was a significator of young people. A strong Mercury in the horoscope often shows what is called the Peter Pan complex. Thus, Gemini naturally knows how to relate to children, though I don't think the sign has much to do with nurturing babies. Rather it's the love of watching the young flower into mature and happy adults. A sense of protectiveness is probably part of this. If we go back to the mythology of the constellation of Gemini, we have the myth of Castor and Pollux. These two brothers were entirely devoted to each other, though one was mortal and the other divine. The mutual devotion was so great that Pollux gave half of his immortality to Castor. This may mean that personal devotion and faithfulness belong to the sidereal sign of Gemini. Sidereal astrologers talk so much about the constellations. It's always been a mystery to me why they don't talk about the **mythology** of the constellations. >...Is it generally the >case that tropical interpretations about a sign relate sidereally to the >planet ruling the preceding sign? A lot of the interpretation relates to the sidereal ruling planet. I also happen to believe that the exaltation planet's influence is there too. There's also the mythology of the constellation which can come into play. Reference: MYTHIC ASTROLOGY by Ariel Guttman and Kenneth Johnson (This is written from the Tropical perspective, but has good chapters on the planets.) Sincerely, Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 On Monday, November 17, 2003 2:34 AM , Therese Hamilton wrote: > <snip very interesting stuff> > A lot of the interpretation relates to the sidereal ruling planet. I > also happen to believe that the exaltation planet's influence is > there too. There's also the mythology of the constellation which can > come into play. > > Reference: MYTHIC ASTROLOGY by Ariel Guttman and Kenneth Johnson > (This is written from the Tropical perspective, but has good chapters > on the planets.) > Many thanks for that, Therese - I'm starting to work with Fixed Stars, too, (I'm using the Starlight software developed by Bernadette Brady) so I'm becoming very interested in the mythology of the constellations, too. Chris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 Hi Therese, I am not so sure that one can always say that the tropical interpretation of one sign is somewhat similar to the sidereal interpretation of the sign before. For example, take any tropical book on Sun signs, and if they talk, let' say, about Leo, they say they don't change their ideas (fixed sign), and that they are fiery. Then Cancer would like to start things (cardinal) and be emotional (water sign). As this attributions of signs already come from Ptolomy, and in Ptolomy's time the sidereal and tropical zodiac were more or less in phase, you do get different interpretations when a planet is in one sign or the sign before. Therefore in my opinion, part of the tropical meaning has become mixed up with the sign before, but not all the meaning. And this explains - in my opinion - why I am getting better results interpreting my own chart with the tropical interpretations of the sidereal placings, than with tropical interpretations of the tropical placings. However a siderealist might also argue that Ptolomy was wrong and that in his time the meanings had already become corrupt, and therefore we should go back 7 centuries or so to Babylon to get the correct meanings!! António , " Chris Mitchell " <chrismitchell@z...> wrote: > On Sunday, November 16, 2003 7:21 PM , > Therese Hamilton wrote: > > > IF...the Tropical interpretation is based on *observation* and not > > theory, this would be correct. The next questions is, " Where does the > > liking to be on center stage come from? The Sun or the Moon? " > > > > Hi, Therese - Yes, that's a very good point - I can see how it works with > Leo/Cancer. > > However, a tropical astrologer would say about someone with 5 degrees Cancer > tropically: " this person has a need for security, and will demonstrate a > theme involving emotional nurturing " - Cancer/Moon. A sidereal astrologer > would say about the same person " this person has Sun at 10 degrees of > Gemini " . Would the interpretation of Gemini, relating to Mercury, be about > security and emotional nurtuing in sidereal astrology? Is it generally the > case that tropical interpretations about a sign relate sidereally to the > planet ruling the preceding sign? > > > Chris. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2003 Report Share Posted November 18, 2003 At 02:09 PM 11/17/03 -0000, Antonio wrote: > >I am not so sure that one can always say that the tropical >interpretation of one sign is somewhat similar to the sidereal >interpretation of the sign before. > >For example, take any tropical book on Sun signs, and if they talk, >let' say, about Leo, they say they don't change their ideas (fixed >sign), and that they are fiery. Then Cancer would like to start >things (cardinal) and be emotional (water sign). Hi Antonio, What you are saying here is that the Tropical interpretation of cardinal, fixed, mutable and the four elements can't really be transferred to the sidereal. And you are correct if these traits are really there. But are they really there in the way that the books say they are? The Trigons or triads--the triplicities go way back before Ptolemy to Mesopotamia, and were associated with the four winds. Ptolemy didn't give them the names of the elements. That happened sometime later, and the psychological traits associated with the elements only came about with Alan Leo around the beginning of the 20th century. In Hellenistic times these triads each had triplicity lords--The Sun and Jupiter for the Aries triad, the Moon and Venus for the Taurus triad and so forth. I have re-done these for the sidereal zodiac where, for example, Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces tend to be emotional signs--fiery if you want to call them that. I hope to have these articles on the web soon, and you can judge them for yourself. In the Tropical zodiac I have a fixed T-cross involving the Sun, Moon, Ascendant lord and Saturn. But my family has nicknamed me 'the embodiment of change.' In the sidereal zodiac I have only one planet in a fixed sign. All the other planets are in mutable or cardinal signs. I've been a Tropical astrologer, a western siderealist, a Jyotish astrologer, tried many house systems, and am still very unsure of how much of astrology operates. I'm not good at prediction because I can look at the horoscope from many different viewpoints and see possibilities in each. Polarity is reversed in the sidereal zodiac. This is too difficult to explain on a discussion list, but the articles will soon be on the web. Fagan was opposed to all kinds of sign categories, but I believe he was wrong in ignoring polarity and the triads (trigons). Fagan was scornful of the wave theory of astrology, which is similar to certain aspects of music, but there are good scientific reasons for various waves running through the zodiac, representing the trigons, polarity, etc. John Addey developed this theory to a high degree. (Harmonics) >Therefore in my opinion, part of the tropical meaning has become >mixed up with the sign before, but not all the meaning. And this >explains - in my opinion - why I am getting better results >interpreting my own chart with the tropical interpretations of the >sidereal placings, than with tropical interpretations of the tropical >placings. This is difficult to discuss without seeing your horoscope. Would you like to post your birth data, and then tell us how you interpret the signs in your chart? This is the only way we'll be able to understand how you see your chart. I'm all for getting down to the nitty-gritty of talking about real horoscopes. >However a siderealist might also argue that Ptolomy was wrong and >that in his time the meanings had already become corrupt, and >therefore we should go back 7 centuries or so to Babylon to get the >correct meanings!! Ptolemy really gave very few interpretations for his sign groups, and little of what he did say is used by astrologers today. Most Tropical interpretation comes from Alan Leo and Charles Carter, many times repeated with slight variations by today's astrological writers. One can't blame Cyril Fagan for being disgusted by it all. On the other hand, he wasn't necessarily right in everything he said. Sincerely, Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2003 Report Share Posted November 18, 2003 Hi Therese, Thanks again for all the useful information. And I sincerely hope you will soon find time to put those articles of yours on the web, not only for my sake, but because there are very few resources on the web on sidereal astrology. > This is difficult to discuss without seeing your horoscope. Would you like > to post your birth data, and then tell us how you interpret the signs in > your chart? This is the only way we'll be able to understand how you see > your chart. I'm all for getting down to the nitty-gritty of talking about > real horoscopes. I was born on February 22, 1961 at 05:00 AM, in Nampula, Mozambique (longitude 39°17' east, latitude 15° 6' south, universal time 03:00). Using SVP, my Sun is at Aquarius 9° 4' and my ascendant at Aquarius 3° 3'. My chart interpretation has bits and pieces written by different astrologers about the various elements in my chart, that I gathered from different sources, and already has close to 400 pages. I do not expect you to match that level of detail here!! But if you feel like it, perhaps you could explain to me why is it that I feel that the tropical interpretation for Sun in Aquarius fits me so much better than tropical interpretation for Sun in Pisces, even if in the tropical zodiac my Sun is in Pisces. For example, Pisceans are supposed to be compassionate, responsive to other people's needs, prone to drinking or drugs, etc, and none of this applies to me. Aquarians are supposed to be into science or computers, very independent minded, like to have their own ideas instead of following other people's ideas, somewhat cold emotionally, etc, and all this applies to me. What do you think? Any explanation? António Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 --- António <Xonicman wrote: Antonio: As this attributions of signs already come from Ptolomy, and in Ptolomy's time the sidereal and tropical zodiac were more or less in phase, you do get different interpretations when a planet is in one sign or the sign before. Therefore in my opinion, part of the tropical meaning has become mixed up with the sign before, but not all the meaning. Elisabeth: I think that's very possible. Antonio: And this explains - in my opinion - why I am getting better results interpreting my own chart with the tropical interpretations of the sidereal placings, than with tropical interpretations of the tropical placings. Elisabeth: Aside from the possibility that there are other things in the birth chart (planetary positions, etc) that could account for this, what you say seems to fit the general pattern that I've observed: It seems that in a very general way, most people I know do seem to fit the description of the tropical sun sign preceding their own better than their own sign (though not always and not in every respect even in the cases that fit). I have a family member whose birthdate is June 22, 1965. The Sun, Mercury, and Venus are all in tropical Cancer, but she behaves like a Gemini and is a quick-learner, curious, interested in learning new things, mischievious (playful), and extroverted rather than sensitive, touchy and nurturing (Cancerian traits according to tropicalists). Since she's born near the cusp between sun in Gemini and Cancer, she chooses to believe that she's a Gemini. Another family member was born on May 29, 1976 with the Sun, Moon and Venus in Gemini. And yet she is warm, emotionally expressive, mother-hen-like, sentimental rather than logical, and the most traditionally " feminine " person I know. Taurus is in theory suppose to be one of the most " feminine " signs. When I was younger, and before I found out about sidereal astrology, I use to read the Pisces profiles in astrology texts even though my sun was in tropical Aries. Not very logical, but Pisces seemed to describe me better, and it was more helpful for me than the Aries profiles were. This is not based on scientific research, but I've also noticed too many Capricorns who are extroverted and outgoing, Librans who are versatile and literary, Aquarians who are quiet and down-to-earth, Pisceans who are logical and open-minded, and Taureans who are ambitious and driven. But the pattern isn't completely consistent. I don't seem to notice many sun in Sagittarius individuals who are secretive and intense. But these same Sagittarians are also not jovial and expansive, which is puzzling. Just wanted to share some of my personal observations. Other people's observations might be different. I'm curious, do you find that tropical interpretations of sidereal signs fit others you know besides yourself? regards, Elisabeth ____________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals..ca Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 > > This is not based on scientific research, but > I've also noticed too many Capricorns who are > extroverted and outgoing, Librans who are > versatile and literary, Aquarians who are quiet > and down-to-earth, Pisceans who are logical and > open-minded, and Taureans who are ambitious and > driven. But the pattern isn't completely > consistent. I don't seem to notice many sun in > Sagittarius individuals who are secretive and > intense. But these same Sagittarians are also not > jovial and expansive, which is puzzling. > > Just wanted to share some of my personal > observations. Other people's observations might > be different. I'm curious, do you find that > tropical interpretations of sidereal signs fit > others you know besides yourself? > > regards, > > Elisabeth > > >> Elizabeth... The trouble with focusing on a sign is it prevents one from understanding " the chart " ... Zodiacal placements(of planets within a chart) usually differ from " Mundo " placements... Understanding the Prime Vertical and Mundoscope Charts are essential for effective charting... Planets near angles usurp the " personality " of the chart just as planets in the background houses compared to foreground houses are diminished in their ability to be recognized.... Since Mercury reflects much of an individuals thinking and communication " signatures " its placement in relationship to the Sun determines if one " sees " an active Sun " sign " or Mercury " sign " . So much contributes to whether you " see " a person's Sun sign or not.... For that matter, one would see another's moon sign before they ever picked up on their Sun.... Is there a zodiac? Is there an ecliptic plane? It's not about this or that... Sidereal or Tropical... Both are working mathematical and physical formulas... Developing an understanding of a cycle that begins and ends with the Spring Equinox is not difficult to grasp... Developing an understanding of a cycle that begins and ends with Spica is also a mathematical paradigm.... Sidereal and Tropical on their own though do not explain the phenomena of " astrology " . The Sun with its " energy " and subsequent dispersal of Solar Winds... The Earths Magnetism as well as that of Jupiter, Saturn and others contributes to our existence and psychological profile. The signs as well as the times they are' a changing... Descriptions of Signs are today a combination.... A mixture of signage terminology. We are a very complex evolution... because as we are the " signs " at birth... We are also the signs of their progression... We are the signs of our Noviens.. Fagan wrote " the words natal Sun are held to mean the " Four Suns. " (a)The Natal Sun (b)the progressed Natal Sun ©the Sidereal Solar Return Sun and (d) the Progressed Sidereal Solar Return Sun. Combine all of the potential signage for all of these " Suns " and you have a storyboard worth of our complex selves... Juan PS: My Sun is in Taurus, Mercury in Gemini and Moon in Aquarius.... I communicate as a Gemini(9th and Background) My views are of an Aquarian(4th and Foreground) and I am one with nature(Live on a Farm)with a Taurean Sun(8th and Middleground). PSS: The Farm is not mine.... Does it change? yes!!! besides the fact that my Moon is Aquarian.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2003 Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 Hi Elisabeth, Thanks for your email. Please see the answers below. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Elisabeth: > Aside from the possibility that there are other > things in the birth chart (planetary positions, > etc) that could account for this, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes, I am very aware of this. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >what you say > seems to fit the general pattern that I've > observed: It seems that in a very general way, > most people I know do seem to fit the description > of the tropical sun sign preceding their own > better than their own sign (though not always and > not in every respect even in the cases that fit). > > This is not based on scientific research, but > I've also noticed too many Capricorns who are > extroverted and outgoing, Librans who are > versatile and literary, Aquarians who are quiet > and down-to-earth, Pisceans who are logical and > open-minded, and Taureans who are ambitious and > driven. But the pattern isn't completely > consistent. I don't seem to notice many sun in > Sagittarius individuals who are secretive and > intense. But these same Sagittarians are also not > jovial and expansive, which is puzzling. > > Just wanted to share some of my personal > observations. Other people's observations might > be different. I'm curious, do you find that > tropical interpretations of sidereal signs fit > others you know besides yourself? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I started looking at sidereal only three weeks ago, and I have been focusing mostly on my chart. I have however taken a quick look at other charts. For example, my brother is a journalist and writer, and has the Sun in tropical Gemini. He is also witty, with a sense of humour, therefore Gemini is a good match. In the sidereal zodiac his Sun is in Cancer, however then his Mercury and Moon move from Cancer (in tropical) to Gemini (in sidereal), so the sidereal match is even better than the tropical. My mother has the Sun in tropical Aries, however (unlike me) she is compassionate, and always concerned about family, or the downtrodden. Very Piscean. However, like you, I also found the pattern is not completely consistent. For example a friend of mine is a double Cancer in tropical, and a double Gemini in sidereal. I see her much more of a Cancer person. However I have not looked at her chart in detail, and as I am a beginner in Astrology, I could be missing important details. Also being a beginner it takes me a long time to read a chart - as I have to consult books - and that is another reason why I have looked at only a few charts. António Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.